I think the Phoenicians are historically enigmatic. If one subscribes to Atlantis, then there may be a tie in, but as a people by themselves, they are a mystery. I tell my SO who is Spanish descent that she is Phoenician! I'm sure I'm right.

I was searching for a book by/about the recently deceased former heavyweight champion, Max Schmelling, and didn't find one. But the ever-helpful search engine at Amazon turned up this title. Your guess is as good as mine for the "why", but in any case, this looks like another title that is good for some laughs.

This book is a great big load of crap. Among other things, the author claims that Thucydides was medieval, that King Arthur was Russian, and that none of the historical medieval British kings existed per se. IOW, he's an a-hole.

When you pinged me on this thread I had Fomenko's History on order, but it had not yet arrived. I received it Monday and have had a look.

IMHO, calling it a "big load of crap" and calling the author names diminishes you, not him. This is a serious book by a scholarly author. He seems to have interested many other serious people in his work, and so what he has to say deserves attention.

I might be a bit biased, as my degrees are in Mathematics (as are Fomenko's), and I have long had the felling that we really don't know too much about what happened before the American colonies were established. (E.g. Did Leif Erikson even exist? The evidence is pretty flimsy.)

BTW, others might be interested to know that among the "serious people" paying attention to Fomenko's work is (former) World Chess Champion Gary Kasparov. Many will know that Kasparov doesn't restrict himself to chess, and is among other things a regular contributor to the Wall Street Journal.

Did George Washington exist? Unlike Lenin's, his body isn't on display for our viewing. The book is a great big load of crap, and saying that (or saying it again) doesn't diminish me, it merely points out that the book is great big load of crap.

I'm not concerned with Kasparov, who is a chess player, or whether he believes Fomenko's load of crap. For a few years now I have been aware that he does believe it, and in a way that is a good thing, because the Arabs, who would normally lap up this Fomenko "New Chronology", rejected it because Kasparov is Jewish.

Paintings can't be faked? Paintings are never done of figures who never existed? Inscriptions exist for everyone who has ever lived *apart* from Leif Erickson?

Fomenko's need for Leif Erickson to not exist is the same as the motivating force behind the rest of Fomenko's load of crap -- the Varangians, who served as mercenaries in the armies of the Byzantine Empire -- an empire that Fomenko claims did exist, because it's part of what he regards as the roots of Russia and therefore all of Europe -- were among the many Scandinavians who wandered through during the Middle Ages. This also included the Rus, a Swedish group, which gave its name to Russia. According to Fomenko, the Russians are the successors to the Byzantines, and all other European history was fabricated based on the Byzantine succession etc.

Fomenko's astronomical "evidence" consists of his saying that there's repetition over long periods in the eclipse cycle, and therefore the Great Fomenko is justified in saying that ancient eclipses documented in surviving ancient accounts aren't ancient, but must have occurred during much later times.

He also claims that early English sources record the term "Years of Grace" which is really "Years of Greece", blah blah blah.

The monumental work The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, written by English historian and scholar Edward Gibbon (1737-1794), is a great source of detailed information on the history of the Roman Empire. Before commenting on this book, let me remark that I cannot imagine how - with their vast territories - the Romans did not use geographical maps, how they conducted trade without a banking system, and how the Roman army, on which the Empire rested, was unable to improve its weapons and military tactics during nine centuries of wars.

With the use of simple mathematics, it is possible to discover in ancient history several such dramatic contradictions, which historians don't seem to consider.

The Romans had no public school system, no postal system... they also didn't have fax machines. The Romans used maps, although very few examples are known to have survived, due to the fragility of the materials used. The Romans did improve weapons and tactics, but stuck with things that worked. Vespasian (the future emperor, at this time a general) used artillery during the conquest of Britain -- but it wasn't barrels, balls, and gunpowder. There are no "contradictions", and obviously no dramatic ones.

Kasparov builds a straw man argument (and there's much more straw on that page) to conclude that the Roman Empire as such never existed. I regard Tom Van Flandern as a very smart man, but he also insists that the "Face on Mars" is an artifact, when the fact is it isn't there at all -- it was an artifact, but only an artifact of the Viking orbiter camera's low resolution (the "Face" is only 30-some pixels in size). This results in Van Flandern's having to believe that NASA is trying to hide The Truth. Kasparov, like Van Flandern, didn't invent the respective foolishness and stupidity involved, merely lends his name to it. If he never repudiates the Fomenko nonsense, that will be his reputation in posterity.

Paintings can't be faked? Paintings are never done of figures who never existed?

Of course they can be. But the provenance of Stuart's works is well established. Contemporaries saw both Stewart's portraits and George Washington, so even if the curators of the NGA have been deceived they at least have a copy of a real painting of a real man.

Fomenko's need for Leif Erickson to not exist

I haven't reached this "need" yet in the book. It's common knowledge that the whole idea of Leif Erikson reaching North America before Columbus is thin gruel.

Fomenko's astronomical "evidence" consists of his saying that there's repetition over long periods in the eclipse cycle

This is certainly the conventional wisdom, though I admit to being a skeptic here. The whole uniformity concept is one that I do not accept, so if that's all Fomenko offers I'll be on your side before long. But that isn't the impression I get from the opening pages of his book.

"The reconstructions of three Norse buildings are the focal point of this archaeological site..."

Fomenko starts out with the belief that all history is Byzantine / Russian; any artifact (such as the Roman imperial road system, Hadrian's Wall in Britain, coins, the topic I've linked below) has to be either coopted into this hijacking of history, or rejected as not proved, or something more recent that has been misinterpreted by everyone before Fomenko. References to Jesus in Josephus and the Koran, or in fact any kind of surviving writing from the ancient world has to be either placed in more recent times (by Fomenko) or tossed as a forgery.

I've got some pretty wild interests myself, and love to plunge over the edge of the fringe from time to time. But I think you'll see what I mean as you read it. Here's a topic related to Roman rule in Europe.

L'Anse aux Meadows National Historic Site of Canada http://www.pc.gc.ca/lhn-nhs/nl/meadows/index_e.asp

"The reconstructions of three Norse buildings are the focal point of this archaeological site..."

I'm not impressed by reconstructions. I went to the site you suggested and found nothing there.

I'm reading more and I have come to AF's trouble with Hebrew texts which consist only of consonants. (This is mostly true but there a couple of "silent" letters which imply some vowel; and the oo and the oh are frequently represented.) He (or the translator) foolishly makes analogies to English where BLD could be blood, build, etc., but does not describe where in Hebrew, which has many fewer words than English, this could lead to significant ambiguities. I sometimes agonize over translations but I don't ever recall it being because one word in the Torah could be construed as some other. Also AF makes it seem as if this non-use of vowels is some ancient artifact when in fact most publications in Israel today do not use vowels (e.g. see http://www.haaretz.co.il/).

But that said, his placement of the cities of the Bible in Italy is at least interesting. (Yes, I know there are problems.) I would note that Mel Gibson choose Italy as the place where he filmed most of the Judean scenes in his Passion.

The notion that a lot of the "ancient" manuscripts are frauds interests me. I see the recent "discovery" of the James Ossuary as typical of what would have passed for truth 500 years ago. The bias is that so long as it fits in with the accepted history it must merit strong consideration, and bring credit to the "discoverers."

I do believe, as does most everyone else, that the reference to Jesus in Josephus is an insertion by transmitters. But if AF is going to argue that the references to Jesus in the Koran are insertions, then I think I am going to have a big problem with that.

The notion that a lot of the "ancient" manuscripts are frauds interests me. I see the recent "discovery" of the James Ossuary as typical of what would have passed for truth 500 years ago. The bias is that so long as it fits in with the accepted history it must merit strong consideration, and bring credit to the "discoverers."

The James Ossuary has never been proved to be a fake. The "report" itself is the pretense. And I am not a Believer.

There's an entire literature of this kind. One can still find "Piso Theory" -- the claim that the entire Bible was hoaxed by members of the Piso family. One forum devoted to the "Piso theory" used to have a sister forum which claimed that the entire Roman Empire was hoaxed in order to justify the "empire" of the Venetians.

Maybe they also hoaxed all the cities of the Bible as well. ;')

Joseph Smith, founder of LDS, and author of the Book of Mormon, built an entirely fraudulent "history" of the Americas. The "cities" he names as precolumbian are actually lifted from the placenames found near where he grew up. A few were taken as-is, most were altered slightly.

114
posted on 04/08/2005 10:54:57 AM PDT
by SunkenCiv
(Deviance or rebellion without consequences is conformity.)

the author's website should be checked before buying this book, because there's a wild mixture, including Edgar Cayce. But the chapter hosted on the Schoch website suggests the book is worth a look at least.

In his bio of Eugene Shoemaker, David Levy, astronomer and codiscoverer of Comet SL-9 (he and Carolyn Shoemaker are both in the top ten comet discoverers -- most comets are now discovered by robotic means so no person gets credit), mentioned Velikovsky: "[i]n 1950 Worlds in Collision was published... Velikovsky inferred from historical facts and mythology that an unlikely series of comet impacts caused some biblical events... The details of Velikovsky's ideas were so strongly ridiculed that his theme that impacts have indeed affected the Earth, was clouded and lost." While there are no impacts of comets in WiC, the fact that Levy alluded to the shameful actions directed against Velikovsky speaks well for his character and fairness as a scientist and writer.

Once it was conceded (very grudgingly!) that the 'Olmecs' did indeed represent the earliest or even Mother Civilization of Mesoamerica, the date of their arrival was at first set at about 250 B.C.; then at about 500 B.C.; then farther back and back, until 1500 B.C. was acknowledged. My conclusion that the Olmec presence in the New World went back at least 5,000 years, to circa 3000 B.C., was reached by many paths. The first one was an attempt to identify the great god of Mesoamerica, the Winged Serpent (Quetzalcoatl to the Aztecs, Kukulkan to the Mayas), and the significance of his promise to return to those lands on the first day of a 52-year cycle, (AD 1519, when the Aztec king Montezuma believed that the appearance of the Spanish conquistador Cortez was such a Return, coincided with the anticipated sacred date).

Sitchin was a follower of Immanuel Velikovsky. Later he came up with his The Twelfth Planet which was reviewed twice in issue IV:4 of KRONOS, the first by Roger Wescott, the other by C. Leroy Ellenberger.

The Mexicologist, Professor George Kubler of Yale, stressed that certain traditions contained in Mesoamerican heritage were referred by me to events of the pre-Christian era. Kubler insisted that this heritage could not date from the 8th to 4th pre-Christian centuries, but rather was generated in the 4th to 8th century of the Christian era. But in December, 1956, the National Geographical Society in conjunction with the Smithsonian Institution made it known that excavations at LaVenta proved by radiocarbon that the classical period of the Meso-American civilizations (Olmec, Toltec, Maya, etc.) needs to be pushed back by a full thousand years and ascribed not to the 4th to 8th centuries of the Christian era but to the 8th to 4th centuries before that era.

In April 1967 the Yale Scientific Magazine published "Venus -- a Youthful Planet" by I.V. (written in 1963), in which Quetzalcoatl/Kukulcan, "the Morning-Evening Star of the Mayas, Olmecs, Toltecs, and Aztecs" is mentioned. The article was reprinted in KRONOS IV:3 in February 1979.

In 1966, in the book The Velikovsky Affair, I.V. noted that the Smithsonian and the National Geographic Society published the scientific dates for artifacts excavated at La Venta -- 800 to 400 BC -- in 1956, twenty years before SItchin scribbled his drivel, and even this chapter by I.V. was ten years ahead of Sitchin.

And of course, the Mesoamerican civilizations are mentioned a number of times in Worlds In Collision -- published in 1950 -- including in the chapter "The Fifty-two Year Period" (begins p 153).

UFO: The Science and Phenomena Magazine for June/July 2003 has an article by Charles Ginenthal, "Immanuel Velikovsky Revisited", and an interview conducted by Don Ecker, "Zecharia Sitchin on Immanuel Velikovsky". Ginenthal is author of several books on Velikovsky and editor of The Velikovskian.

The Sitchin interview is a hoot. Sitchin claims that he was researching ancient times back when Worlds In Collision first came out, and that his daughter had given him the book for his birthday. That would make Sitchin between 80 and 90 years old, estimating that his daughter was at least ten in 1950 (that's when WiC was first published), and that she was born when Sitchin was 20 years old.

Sitchin also claims that Velikovsky "did not mention, even once, Sumer or the Sumerians in his writings. I do not know how he missed it, unless he found it contradicted his work."

The fact is, Velikovsky mentions Sumer, Sumerians, and/or the Sumerian culture or written records at least five times in three of his published books, once in Harpers (1951), and in Pensee'. This is an example of Sitchin saying more than he knows, or perhaps it's merely a fabrication.

Sitchin also spouts his usual mumbo-jumbo about the significance of certain Mesopotamian customs and his view of their origin. The fact is, Sitchin's claim that the Earth originated in a collision (3.9 billion years ago, according to Sitchin in this interview) between two bodies, at least one of which no longer exists, isn't supported by Sumerian legend. Period. There's simply nothing of the kind in surviving Sumerian legend.

There's also nothing to his claim of a planet on an eccentric, 3600 year long orbit around the Sun. There is no such planet. As the former Velikovsky supporter, C. Leroy Ellenberger pointed out in his contemporary review (KRONOS Vol. 4:4) of Sitchin's first cult classic, The Twelfth Planet, the orbital characteristics Sitchin claims are given by the Sumerian records aren't consistent with laws of planetary motion.

Ellenberger also pointed out that in The Twelfth Planet Sitchin claims that the planet Marduk passed through in 3800 BC, but with a 3600 year orbital period, there must have been a passage in 200 BC, which Sitchin doesn't mention. In the same issue, Roger Wescott also reviews The Twelfth Planet and quotes from it: "all the ancient languages . . . including early Chinese . . . stemmed from one primeval source -- Sumerian." Wescott then points out that Sumerian has no known linguistic relatives, living or dead.

122
posted on 08/10/2005 10:56:02 PM PDT
by SunkenCiv
(Down with Dhimmicrats! I last updated by FR profile on Tuesday, May 10, 2005.)

R.Shand, who used to have a large number of pages on the www, went with a pay to play system a few years ago. I've still got a few things of interest, but the URLs are not going to work, so don't write in, okay? :')

"Keftiu and Isy [Cyprus] are under awe of thee. I cause them to see their majesty as a young bull. Firm of heart, sharp of horns, who cannot be felled."

"If Solon had inquired more particularly about Keftiu, he would have been told that it was an island far away in the west. The Ipuwer papyrus uses the phrase, 'as far away as Keftiu.'..." -- J. V. Luce, Lost Atlantis: New Light on an Old Legend (1969)

Luce's psychic prediction aside, Keftiu does not refer to Crete, it refers to Cyprus. This term "Isy" probably refers to Crete. IOW, and not surprisingly, Luce had it backwards. Also not surprisingly, Shand once again failed to do his homework. Velikovsky solved this problem decades ago. The Assyrian king Esarhaddon left a record of Tarshish:

The identities of the first two countries mentioned by Esarhaddon are known: Iadanan is Cyprus and Iaman is the Ionian coast of Asia Minor... Had Tarshishi been a city the name would have been preceded by the determinative URU; however, as mentioned above, it has mat for "country". It is also difficult to see how a place in Cilicia would fit the description "from Iadanana and Iaman as far as Tarshishi." Clearly Tarsisi was farther west than either Cyprus or Ionia. These criteria are filled admirably by Crete.

References to the ships of Tarshish and to a place of that name, in the Old Testament, beginning with the time of Solomon (10th century), to the time of the prophets of the 8th and 7th centuries, make me think that by this designation the Cretan navigators and Crete itself were meant. The Minoan civilization survived until the great catastrophes of the 8th century and it would be strange if it and its maritive activities remained unmentioned in the Old Testament.

The usual explanation puts Tarshish in Spain, though other identifications are offered, like Tarsus, in Asia Minor. One of the old names for Knossos sounds like Tarshish.

Velikovsky also points out that Kaphtor, a place name which occurs many times in the Old Testament, must refer to Cyprus, otherwise there is no term that does [Ages In Chaos, p 201, in footnote: "If Caphtor was not Cyprus, then no name for Cyprus and no mention of the island would be found in the Scriptures, and that would be unlikely because Cyprus is very close to Syria."]. The similarity of Kaphtor and Keftiu (and Cyprus for that matter) is obvious. The Akkadians and Assyrians referred to Egypt as Msr, or "musri", and the Biblical era name for Egypt was Mizraim. On the modern map of Egypt I bought at the locally owned large bookstore the name is given as Egypt, and also "Misr".

The Mycenaeans were the Achaeans, and took over from the Minoans virtually everywhere sometime before the Trojan War. The major towns of the Achaeans were destroyed within fifty years of the war, and many sites were abandoned, never to be rebuilt. Generally the arrival of the Dorians is said to have resulted in their destruction, but as is the case in many places in the world today, some modern Greeks claim that there was no such invasion, that the Dorians were always there.

In Velikovsky's chronology, the Trojan War took place sometime between 720 BC and 687 BC (the latter date being the destruction of Phyrgia).

124
posted on 08/16/2005 9:53:33 AM PDT
by SunkenCiv
(Down with Dhimmicrats! I last updated by FR profile on Sunday, August 14, 2005.)

The Society for Interdisciplinary Studies The SIS was formed in 1974 in response to a growing interest in the works of modern catastrophists such as Dr Immanuel Velikovsky, stimulating controversy in the fields of cosmology, geology and ancient history. The SIS publishes two high quality journals which have included articles by and about Velikovsky.

The Immanuel Velikovsky Archive. Maintained by a team of historians to ensure the integrity and preservation of Velikovskys unpublished writings, the Archive is strictly non-profit and its sole purpose is the advancement of education and scholarship.

Kronia Communications Offering access to a number of sources and products, Kronia aims to bring about a greater understanding of the work of Immanuel Velikovsky and his colleagues. Includes background information, biography, dozens of articles, recent developments in the field such as the Saturn Hypothesis, and a video documentary "Remembering the End of the World"

Aeon, A Journal of Myth & Science First published in 1988, Aeon builds on the works Immanuel Velikovsky, presenting further evidence of catastrophic planetary interactions in historic times. It is devoted to the collection and exploration of archaeo-astronomical traditions and analysis of common patterns in ancient myths from around the world.

The VelikovskianThe Velikovskian journal offers an open discussion of whether there were global cataclysms in human history, their cause, nature and impact of these upheavals. As an important issue in science, history and humanity, it is deserving of our attention. Also features the book, Carl Sagan & Immanuel Velikovsky.

125
posted on 08/18/2005 8:14:44 AM PDT
by SunkenCiv
(Down with Dhimmicrats! I last updated by FR profile on Sunday, August 14, 2005.)

I have some sad news to report. I did a Google search for Robert Compton and found that he'd died in April. I've corresponded with him for, hmm, about fifteen years, and he was a good guy, and a smart guy. He was generous, sending me a copy of another book he'd self-published, as well as a couple gizmos he'd invented (not electronic or anything, just a handy gadget).

Robert had retired perhaps eight years ago and had turned one of his many hobbies into a fulltime thing -- high powered amateur rocketry. Below I've reprised links and quotes regarding his rocket work, and (the reason this is a Velikovsky ping) a link to his book on Velikovsky's chronology revision. I'll be changing my Amazon profile to reflect his decease, as I've been referring people directly to him (via email) when they've wanted to buy one of his remaining copies of the V book. As he said, "it's a good book".

Rest in peace, old bud'. Glad you were right at it right to the end. Sorry I never got to meet you in person.

SACRAMENTO - A man severely burned while building small rockets in his Antelope garage earlier this month died Wednesday night in UC Davis Medical Center, authorities said.

Robert Wayne Compton, 62, was in his garage on Grey Livery Way when the fire started about 7:30 p.m. April 9. The fire was quickly put out, but Compton was severely burned, Sacramento Metro Fire District officials said.

Compton was transported to the Medical Center with burns over more than 30 percent of his body.

An investigation indicated Compton was distilling hydrogen peroxide just before the blaze, district spokesman Engineer Christian Pebbles said.

"Our present plan for the coming year is to develop an 8'' diameter 500 lb/sec throttleable regeneratively cooled motor. The performance of the H2O2/kerosene motors is not trivial producing the highest density impulse of any usable oxidizer/fuel combination. We hope this report will encourage further development among amateur rocket designers."

Jacobovici believes that archaeology does support the Bible, though his arguments are based on a rethinking of the events and some chronological tinkering.

First, he sets the Exodus some 300 years earlier than the traditional timeline  to around 1500 B.C.  and identifies the ancient Israelites with the Hyksos, a Semitic people living in Egypt at that time who, according to the program, suddenly fled the country en masse.

The earlier date of the Exodus proves key to Jacobovici's thesis, as it places it at the time of the cataclysmic eruption of the volcano on the Greek island of Santorini, the linchpin to many of the theories proposed. Citing documented modern parallels such as the 1986 Lake Nyos disaster in Cameroon, he believes that much of what the Book of Exodus describes can be explained by a chain reaction of natural phenomena, triggered by the Santorini eruption and a related earthquake.

The equating of the Hebrews (who were held as slaves by the Egyptians) with the Hyksos (who invaded Egypt and ruled over it) is a dangerously stupid idea, and not original to Jacobovici.

'In Ages in Chaos I have exposed the untruth of Manetho's identification of the Israelites with the Hyksos. Manetho was an Egyptian historian of the third pre-Christian century writing in Greek. The hatred that until then was directed against the almost legendary Hyksos, the early conquerors and exploiters of Egypt, was from then on directed against the Jewish people. I showed also that the Hyksos, known to the Egyptians as the Amu, were the same as the Amalekites of the Bible who dominated the Near East, as well as Palestine, during the long period of the wandering in the desert and of the Judges; I quoted numerous old Arabian authors who describe the conquest of Syria-Palestine and Egypt by the Amalekites and the domination of Egypt for four or five centuries by the Amalekite dynasties of kings.

'The mode of exploitation of Egypt by the Amu as described by the Egyptian sources, and of Palestine by the Amalekites as described by the biblical books, was identical; and, most important, it was shown that it was King Saul, the first king of the Israelites, who succeeded in terminating the Amalekite rule by capturing their stronghold, el-Arish, which is but the ancient Avaris, together with their last king, Agog.

'The Jewish people harboured a deep hatred of the Amalekites from the days of the wandering in the desert, where the former, tired and thirsty, were mercilessly pillaged by the Amalekites and Medianites who would regularly invade the country with their numerous cattle before the harvest. This hatred was kept alive not only through all the centuries of Israel's and Judah's life in their own land, but also through the long period of their diaspora, or world exile, down to our own days.

'The Jewish historian of the first century of the present era, Josephus Flavius, accepted Manetho's identification of the Israelite's with the Hyksos, and by that time the anti-Semitism of which Manetho three centuries earlier was the first known literary source had already spread in the ancient East.'

I had a coupon that would expire on the 31st, so I swung in, and found this. Looks like the first 100 or so pages are actually Wilson's unsubstantiated speculation as seen in the title, the rest a regurgitation of stuff like "The Hiram Key". IOW, this should be good for a few laughs at least. :')

Best Buy RewardZone had sent me a $5 off coupon which expires on the 21st. Up early for the change -- and out of the house, who'd have guessed? -- I wandered the east side of town for a while and came up with this title, $5 off:

I've never seen any of these, don't get cable or satellite, and actually seldom watch broadcast TV (I get zero stations here for some reason). This looks like its up my alley, and I've got to pick up new documentaries every once in a while just to keep my mind sharp and my debt high. Motivates me to go to work every day. ;') After I watch this a few times I plan to review it.

I've got a gift certificate for a local shop, that will probably be a CD, or more than one if I get something used.

In The Lost Testament, Rohl raises the date for the end of the Late Bronze Age to c. 886 BC (p. 452), which may seem to resolve the Samaria problem. However, while it would (at a pinch) explain Samaria's Iron Age I pottery, it is inconsistent with Rohl's own Egyptian dates. There is good evidence for placing the Late Bronze-Iron Age transition in the reign of Ramesses III, for whom Rohl gives dates of 863-832 BC (Lost Testament, p. 454). In Rohl's revised Egyptian chronology, the Late Bronze Age should therefore end around 850 BC. This is not early enough to solve the Samaria problem. Rohl has argued (in personal communications) that some Iron Age I pottery forms may have come into use before the end of the Late Bronze Age. This is reasonable, and could explain the Iron Age I pottery at Samaria. However, it does not explain why Late Bronze Age forms are absent there... Both James et al. and Rohl argue that the 21st and 22nd Dynasties should be overlapped because: (i) there is an unexplained gap in the burials of Apis bulls (an important cult at Memphis) from the end of the 20th Dynasty until the early 22nd Dynasty; (ii) a cache of mummies whose burial is dated to the reign of Siamun, penultimate king of the 21st Dynasty, included the mummy of an official who died early in the following (22nd) Dynasty; (iii) at Tanis the tomb of Osorkon II (22nd Dynasty) appears to have been built before that of Psussenes I (21st Dynasty)... As noted in chapter 4, the Assyrian practice of keeping eponym lists means that Assyrian chronology is accurate to within a year back to 911 BC. Actually Assyriologists would say it has been reconstructed with reasonable accuracy back to at least 1400 BC. Although eponym lists are fragmentary before 911 BC, the Assyrian King List (extant in five copies) is held to provide a reliable framework from the 8th century BC back to the middle of the second millennium.

Bimson is now more at home with James et al -- but James et al have made a blanket condemnation of the Assyrian king lists, claiming that three or more dynastic lists from a similar number of independent Assyrian states existing in parallel have been blended to create the unified list. This would be analogous to the Babylonian king lists, which definitely do show a series of dynasties where a number of parallel city-state dynasties are now known to have existed.

Roger Henry, author of "The Synchronized History" at message 58, passed away a few years ago, as I discovered to my dismay some months ago.

Here's a book which has a similar origin. I didn't check this topic, maybe I've posted a link to this before. Sweeney has a view that 9/11 was plotted by the gubmint, and that's a view that makes it difficult to take this book entirely seriously.

His bio mentions he's an MD, and got interested in the topic after attending the 1979 conference in Britain which resulted in the Glasgow Chronology, from which both Peter James et al, and David Rohl sprang. Newgrosh is a frequent contributor to the NC forum.

As Dirkzwager has also noted, Bocchoris, the "one man dynasty" -- the Twenty-Fourth, and Putibisti of Tanis in the Twenty-Third Dynasty, also appear in Assur-bani-pal's account of the 667 B.C. rising against him. This correlation gives us a peg on which to hang the Twenty-Third and Twenty-Fourth Dynasties. Again, let us note the contrast with Clapham, who identifies Bocchoris with Arzu and places him at 717 B.C. In my scheme Bocchoris belongs 40 years later, and Arzu as Uzziah over 50 years before Clapham's date. This model also invalidates Donovan Courville's wherein the Twenty-Second Dynasty was Assyrian in origin, and established by Assur-bani-pal. Far from the last great Assyrian tyrant founding the Twenty-Second Dynasty, on this model he ended it. My model also invalidates the original Glasgow scheme of things for the Third Intermediate Period, whereby the Twenty-Second Dynasty was placed c.620-400 B.C., but there should be at least no argument over that, as the Glasgow school leaders themselves, recognizing the impossibility of this solution, have retreated to their James-Rohl model, which gives up Velikovsky's Hatshepsut-Solomon, Thutmose III-Shishak, and El Amarna-House of Ahab correlations entirely. On my model all these correlations still hold. I will further remark here that the Twenty-First Dynasty may be seen to have continued down alongside the Twenty-Sixth Saite Dynasty. Thus, in answer to Korbach there is no difficulty in finding references to Twenty-Second, Twenty-Third, and Twenty-Fourth Dynasty rulers in the Serapeum, before the reign of Psamteq I. Obviously, Amyrtaeus (463-454) and Nef'awi-rudj (399-393) belong to a later date, and have no connection with the Twenty-First Dynasty. It is not surprising therefore to find no references to them in the activities of Si-Amon, at the end of the Twenty-First Dynasty... I follow Dirkzwager's absolute dates for the Twenty-Second Dynasty, 780-660 B.C. (approximately), but not his biblical and Nineteenth-Twentieth Dynasty chronologies relative to it. The Third Intermediate models of Velikovsky, Glasgow, Courville, James-Rohl, and Clapham are all rejected.

Another Sweeney book which, according to a reader review: "Joseph (of the many-coloured coat) was the same person as Imhotep". Huh?

[R]ealizing that the sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt took place not during the New Kingdom but during the preceding Middle Kingdom, in order to find out whether the personality of Joseph or the patron of the early stage of his career, Potiphar, is referred to in the historical documents, we have to look into those of the Middle Kingdom. The task appears simple. According to the Book of Genesis Potiphar was "an officer of Pharaoh, captain of the guard." In the register of the private names to the Ancient Records of Egypt by James Breasted, we find the name Ptahwer. Ptahwer was at the service of the Pharaoh Amenemhet III of the Twelfth Dynasty of the Middle Kingdom. According to an inscription of Ptahwer at Sarbut el-Khadem in Sinai dated in the forty-fifth year of Amenemhet III, his office was that of "master of the double cabinet, chief of the treasury." ...Since there is only one Ptahwer in the historical documents, and since he lived in the time when we expect to find him, we are probably not wrong in identifying the biblical Potiphar with the historical Ptahwer... In the days of Amenemhet III there occurred in Egypt a famine enduring nine long years... Thus it seems that the Pharaoh in whose days was the seven yearsâ famine was the successor of the Pharaoh in whose days began the rise of Josephâs career (if Yatu is Joseph). Potiphar, who lived under Amenemhet III, probably lived also under his successor. The inscription which deals with Ptahwer mentions a man whose name is transliterated by Breasted as Y-t-w. Among the monuments of Amenemhet IIIâs reign is one of the Storekeeper who was honored together with two other persons... If we remember that according to the Scriptural narrative Joseph was appointed storekeeper of the State (Gen. 41:40-41) in anticipation of the seven lean years, with the powers of a chief Minister of State or Vice-King, we may suspect in Yatu the Biblical Joseph. In the Scriptures it is said that his name was changed by Pharaoh to Zaphnath-paaneah, but still his original name may have been in use until he became next to the Pharaoh in importance.

Rohl (in "Pharaohs and Kings") follows Kenneth Kitchen that Zaphnath-paaneah translates as "he who is called Pa'aneah", and that Pa'aneah was really Ipiankhu, a name common in the Middle Kingdom but "'not any later.'" His Biblical wife Asenath was named "Ius-en-at ('she belongs to you')". [p 350]

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.